On multiples and consistency- my own musings, forgive me if this is repititous

[overlord-mordax.livejournal.com]

Its seems to me that the misunderstandings people have in regards to people who are multiple arises out of a single misapprehension which can be understood thusly:

Most people ‘understand’ multiplicity as one person with one reaction-set (personality) in which each reaction/emotion is personified. In such a model one ‘alter’ would be the persononification of ‘anger’ and would always ‘come out’ when the person was angry, one ‘person’ is always sad, etcetera. In this model the “multiple” in question has a single unified personality simply broken down into named bits. The person will react the same way to the same stimulus every time.
That is the way multiplicity is typically portrayed in the media, and so the way the layman understands it.

The way I have seen multiplicity to work however is radically different. What I would call ‘true’ multiplicity is one person/body with many (multiple) reaction-sets (personalities). Instead of each person being one emotion, each has a full range of emotions. Every system member has his own way of dealing with anger, sadness, fear, etcetera. Some may respond to one stimulus more strongly, and move to the front when in occurs if they have been co-present, but still each person within the body has a reaction to the stimulus if they are aware of it.

The true multiple is in fact more confusing and frightening to the average person than the media image is because the true multiple will not react the same way to the same stimulus every time. Each system member will have a consistent and coherent personality, but an observer will only see one body behaving inconsistently e.g. reacting differently to getting angry depending on who is out at the front- handling an event time with a sigh and a shrug that the day-or even hours-before would have brought on ugly faces and a stream of cursing.

Man longs for consistency in his realm, science is based on the idea that an experiment preformed the same way under the same conditions will have the same outcome. On the surface multiples seem to break this rule, however this is simply a problem of lack of enough information. A person who is aware that a body contains multiple people will see that despite outward appearances of inconsistency internal consistency is maintained, as each person is consistent to his self.

-Grima

Comments

[padawanagain.livejournal.com]

This is a very good essay on this subject.

That's one of the complaints that our ex-husband gave - inconsistency. He subscribed to that example that you described. In the end he couldn't understand that we all had our own opinions and would not bow to his.

Anyway.

Bravo.

[overlord-mordax.livejournal.com]

Thank you very much. We are having a similar experience with our new friend. He was talking to Bunny last night and was quite surprised when she did not react to something in the same way as Massha, who had had preveviously been talking to, would have.

-Grima

[overlord-mordax.livejournal.com]

Permission granted, I'm honored by your request.

-Grima

[overlord-mordax.livejournal.com]

Out of curiosity, where do you intend to repost it?

-Grima

[krystale.livejournal.com]

I find some sort of middle ground there to be most true. Many of us have an emotion we specialise it, like when any of us are afraid it will make Geoff come out (he's our protector). However we're not each just an emotion, we're more of a perspective or cluster of opinions. Individually we're each fairly consistant, the inconsistancy comes into play greatest if you don't know how to recognise a switch. (This may be similar to what you meant, with a different... ::snickers:: perspective.)

This was good to read, well written and thought out. Thankyou for sharing with us.

[fogsystem.livejournal.com]

Well said indeed. I've never heard a better explaination *nodnodclapclap*

~Alana

[rhymer-713.livejournal.com]

That was very beautifully written and we loved it and found it very true. Very very nice job.

[thecuteone33.livejournal.com]

Novel idea --

Someone mentioned to me the other day -- and after hearing it -- I realized it explains a lot..

What about one personality "feels/analyzes" what's happening and a different one reacts??? Light bulb went off in my head when I heard that...

OF course I'm not clear who does what...except that explains some of the drama I've gotten sucked into in the past 3-4 months...

[thecuteone33.livejournal.com]

and oh yeah...consistency is really common...people tend to pick up on more when I'm chatting online with them in real time -- not so much face to face...

But the inconsistencies tend to be fairly suddenly or polarized..

[overlord-mordax.livejournal.com]

*nod* The same phenomenon often happens to us, though I think the body's father can tell when we switch face to face-even if he doesn't know exactly what is happening, because he has indirectly commented on it in the past.

I'm glad you wewre able to relate to my thoughts of the subject.

-Grima

[aneras.livejournal.com]

I posted this in my LJ. (http://aneras.livejournal.com/39349.html)
I can remove it if you want

[overlord-mordax.livejournal.com]

You're welcome to have it there. I'm flattered. Thank you for the link and credit.

-Grima

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

May we have this for the website, please?

[overlord-mordax.livejournal.com]

You certainly may. I haven't perused your site myself myself but David says to tell you he likes it a lot.

-Grima

[phen0type.livejournal.com]

Thank you for this insightful essay; I rather agree with it and it dovetails with my own definition of personhood, which is that thinking, discrete agents can be classed as people. There is a vast difference between several actual people in a body and mere personfied emotions, and I do wish that that the old idea of multiplicity would be replaced with this truer one.

Richard
Fen Group

[daphyn.livejournal.com]

This is amazing, and Frederick applauds your understanding.

[inmonopolus.livejournal.com]

Oohh.. So, in essence, I take that to mean most people see multiples as a sort of prism through which each system member is a single colour, or emotion--consistently so. When in reality, a multiple is a kind of...well, analogies fail me--perhaps a box of differently shaped prisms, each one having its own little rainbow of colours--and at any one time, a different prism is at the top of the box, refracting the light as it will.

I think some people have difficulty accepting that one body can have many people to it with their own dreams and desires--and you're right, the outward appearances can be very misleading for people who aren't receptive to this idea.

That's probably the reason some people assign multiples as being bipolar--because taken as one person, the mood of the 'singular' multiple is uncontrollable. But if one considers there are many minds taking in information and processing it differently...

Wow. :3 That's actually a really brilliant, pithy sort of way to explain it without a lot of words that some people might not be familiar with. Thank you for the food for thought!

~Theo

[overlord-mordax.livejournal.com]

Thank you very much. I do like the prism analogy.

-Grima

[thecuteone33.livejournal.com]

More on this --

I'm starting to understand agendas of others in my system more -- what's interesting..that there's a compartmentalization and separation on who feels and who reacts...

For instance -- Myself the host -- I tend to be more passive and non-confrontational - Charlie um..he's the opposite...and he'll go to the ends of the earth to get that confrontation and if it means kinda being an asshole about it -- he'll do it. off the surface this is what everyone calls being "Passive Aggressive"..but both of these things are disconnected and separated off.

This makes it hard for me the host to react appropriately and probably the best thing to do is to to let it go and not defend what's been done/said by Charlie. But it's usually me that feels it and him reacting that same vicious cycle and disconnect.

I don't know about others in my system -- if this is true also -- I don't think so.

And the who does the feeling and reacting -- that changes too...depending on the issue.

Does this ring anything to anyone?

[spookshow-girl.livejournal.com]

It's not how we experience things.

However understanding of each other is always a good goal. I'm sure you realise that, since you're working on it. ;)

Does he understand that the consequences are affecting your life as well as his?

--Me

[spookshow-girl.livejournal.com]

Oh, to clarify, our experiences aren't the same, but the most analogous circumstance is that, since we're often aware of each other's experiences, and the resultant emotions, it will occasionally result in "stereo".

Example: Someone does something to hurt her feelings. Now, I get to see, even when others don't, the hurt she feels. I know when she's faking a smile, unless she's faking it at me. Now, the person apologizes to her, but I'm upset. Someone hurt my friend, how am I supposed to feel? Same thing goes in reverse.

And, because of this, some people don't understand why one of us may feel resentful after it's supposedly "resolved".

This is only a rough explaination. Since we're dealing with interpersonal scenarios, the reality is much more complicated. For example, we do need to be able to handle these situations on our own. There's a fine line between being supportive friends, and becoming codependent. Constantly meddling doesn't help. Sometimes you need to trust the other person's judgement, and drop it. Often, actually.

--Me

[thecuteone33.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the example -- I think the "stereo" situation happens frequently..

More and more I talk or explain this -- then I'm becoming more clear what does happen...

I think where myself and "Charlie" gets stuck is when he's on this mode, "This is BS...and I'm gonna tell this person off..." and I'm usually pretty passive...but often my feelings of insecurities feeds the "I'm gonna tell this person off..." but generally he's the one that takes action and I end up dealing with it later.

But I really understood when you mentioned some people don't understand why one of of us feel resentful after it's supposedly "resolved"...this is interesting..because I think Charlie tends to tie in current events with old (similar issues) that were never resolved in the first place (in his mind anyways). I don't know if it's common for individuals within the same system get old events mixed up with new.

It's interesting - I've had some friends say "well there's a reason why he's reacting so strongly -- you need to trust it".. my issue isn't so much reacting -- but the method and the havoc he creates doing it...there needs to be a better way of handling...I think he struggles more with interpersonal relationships with people outside of my system than I do. But then I DO sit on the other extreme and take A lot of abuse from others...

Yin/Yang.. but there's no balance -- not yet anyways... I think he needs to deal with issues on how to better manage anger & fear (sometimes it's my fear and sense of helplessness that drives what he does) separately so he can better handle interpersonal dramas/issues as opposed to being very passive aggressive (his current pattern so far).

and the problem I have with passive-aggressiveness -- well I don't realize until after the fact...

Sorry so long of a response...

--Carrie--